The Case of JonBenet Ramsey-CBS Sept. 18 # 3

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Bill W said:
I think John Lesko was the rival love interest for Geena Davis in "The Fly". :)
Click to expand...

Don't start that up again, Bill W, I just went through a hurricane last night!!! :tantrum::tantrum::tantrum:
 
keyleigh said:
So BR has to try and convince the court that he hasn't courted the attention at all then huh? Pity he did that little interview with Dr Phill. :laughing:
Click to expand...
I'm not convinced that a single interview would automatically make him a public figure, at least under Michigan law.

http://www.dmlp.org/legal-guide/michigan-defamation-law

Limited-Purpose Public Figure

A limited-purpose public figure is a person who voluntarily injects himself or is drawn into a particular public controversy. However, a private person is not automatically transformed into a limited-purpose public figure merely by becoming involved in or associated with a matter that attracts public attention. A court will look to the nature and extent of the individual's participation in the controversy. New Franklin Enterprises v. Sabo, 480 N.W.2d 326, 328 (Mich. App. 1991).

In Michigan, the following persons have been considered limited-purpose public figures:

The owner of a private art school was a public figure for the limited range of issues relating to the art school, its administration, and its problems;

A wife of a public official who injected herself into a public controversy made her a public figure for purpose of the controversy bolstered by the fact she was married to a public figure.

A retired schoolteacher who worked for the public school system for 30 years, regularly attended and voiced concerns at School Board meetings, and had his own talk show entitled "One Man's Opinion" where he discussed matters relating to the Board.

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk
 
dogperson said:
If "SBTC" means anything, I think the best idea that's been suggested for it is Saved By The Cross. As a Christian, this would be meaningful to Patsy, plus she even had some photos made while she was nearly bald from cancer treatments and at least one of those photos featured a large cross which she stated had "saved her". I've seen her wearing crosses in some family photos too. This was something very important to her and a part of her personality, so Saved By The Cross makes sense to me. I used to think maybe she just signed some random initials at the bottom of the ransom letter but now I think maybe she was reminding herself that she can ask forgiveness for the cover-up she's taking part in. (For the record, my theory and opinion is that BR did it all except the ransom note and the redressing.) She would have felt God would understand that she desperately has to do whatever necessary to save BR now that a terrible thing has already happened and she may have been praying for God to forgive her for not seeing an attack like this coming.

The problem with signing ANYTHING at the bottom of the ransom note is that a real kidnapper would probably not do it. Who would put initials that might point back to their identity? Writing SBTC is a mistake a person would make who knows nothing about crime or ransom notes.

Her sister saying she got "victory" when she died may simply mean she was released from her illness. As an evangelical Christian, I've heard similar things said at funerals, that the person "is healed in heaven", has "moved on up", has "graduated", has "overcome", has "won the battle". Or it could have meant more, if Patsy's sister was privy to what really went on in the Ramsey house Christmas night.
Click to expand...
The day JBR got killed, the fact they put 25-12 on her tombstone, the fact John Ramsey has found Saviour... I'm basicly waiting for one of you here - with more Bible knowledge, and more knowledge about their Epsico.. church- to fill in the blanks.

Read psalms from 35-135 and ask yourself the following questions:

What's the subject of these pslams, which John was reading at the time.
When/in what kind of circumstances does one require to be saved (by the cross).

To me a cross also stands for crucifiction, for paying the ultimate price while innocent, for a grave...
maybe in their minds JBR was SBTC that day.
 
Wyle_E_Coyote said:
I'm not convinced that a single interview would automatically make him a public figure, at least under Michigan law.

http://www.dmlp.org/legal-guide/michigan-defamation-law

Limited-Purpose Public Figure

A limited-purpose public figure is a person who voluntarily injects himself or is drawn into a particular public controversy. However, a private person is not automatically transformed into a limited-purpose public figure merely by becoming involved in or associated with a matter that attracts public attention. A court will look to the nature and extent of the individual's participation in the controversy. New Franklin Enterprises v. Sabo, 480 N.W.2d 326, 328 (Mich. App. 1991).

In Michigan, the following persons have been considered limited-purpose public figures:

The owner of a private art school was a public figure for the limited range of issues relating to the art school, its administration, and its problems;

A wife of a public official who injected herself into a public controversy made her a public figure for purpose of the controversy bolstered by the fact she was married to a public figure.

A retired schoolteacher who worked for the public school system for 30 years, regularly attended and voiced concerns at School Board meetings, and had his own talk show entitled "One Man's Opinion" where he discussed matters relating to the Board.

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Involuntary public figure doctrine due to high profile case perhaps? In that case even after not being named a suspect, BR's possible involvement would remain a controversy in the court of the public opinion. Then on top BR chose to conduct the interviews and even added some (to the public) unknown facts (flashlight story for example, sneaking down). In my book, he is a (at least involuntary) public figure now.

-Nin





-Nin
 
SCHMAE said:
AH TY! I saw last week he planned to sue CBS and I assumed ( oops ) this was regarding the tv show.
Click to expand...
Oh they plan to sue CBS too. I sure hope that they do too. Then hopefully they will release the missing two hours of the CBS documentary. I think imho when LWs threatened to sue they pulled the most damning evidence from the show just to release it into the court hearing. Then the info is on legal papers. LWs and the Ramsey greed train is about to derail itself. Can't wait! CBS has those DEEP pockets. LW is barking up the wrong tree. This time maybe all of the sealed records possibly could be unsealed and they can't hide anymore. At one time I had some sympathy for Burke. But no more. He is a monster that his parents covered for. He was a monster then and he is one now too. It's time for everyone who has protected them this far to get off the Ramsey train and tell what they know. They owe at least that to JonBenet. 20 yrs is a long time for people to keep secrets. The Ramsey's shouldn't be protected. They never should have been to begin with. No kid gloves anymore. Let the cards fall where they may.
If I was Spitz lawyers I would be getting every single person who knew them to do a deposition. Someone will crack. It's against the law to withhold vital information to a case. So those who are still protecting them could be in trouble too.
JonBenet died a horrific death by one of the three people in that home that night imho and I also think it was Burke and intentional.
I'm sick of rich people skirting the law. It's time for answers. It's time for justice for JonBenet however that should come.

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk
 
CoreyRocks said:
Look at this on eBay http://www.ebay.com/itm/391559096305

Any thoughts on this book? Anyone read it? I haven't seen this one either.

Thanks in advance for any information.
Click to expand...
It's available for free if you have Kindle Unlimited. Here's a Topix thread on it, haven't finished but it appears to be a book accusing Linda Hoffman Pugh, the housekeeper.
http://m.topix.com/forum/news/jonbenet-ramsey/TD4L6A6VMMT70QVSS
Personally I think her and her family have suffered enough. Someone in the thread actually linked to some information about the time that notorious piece of shi- I mean, piece of work Jameson sicced the CBI on the Pughs, alleging to have found child *advertiser censored* depicting LHPs husband and teenage daughter. Spoiler alert, it wasn't.

Jameson is the "peripheral character" who wrote the other book you were inquiring about. I was shocked to see it was only $26 because the last time I read about it she was charging over $100 a pop on eBay!! If it's what I think it is, it's a play she wrote about JonBenet's murder and her poor, innocent parents being persecuted. She claimed that she would also "clear" a suspect IDIs discuss online based on her own "investigation" in this exclusive collectors edition manuscript. You'd think getting the truth out would be more important than having a twist for a book no more than 3 people on earth would ever buy (if we're generous) but whatever.

Here's an old thread about the first news about her play:
http://www.forumsforjustice.org/forums/showthread.php?6770-Jameson-s-project
And an old thread about the paperback version you found on eBay, haven't read this one yet:
http://www.forumsforjustice.org/forums/showthread.php?8653-Jameson-s-Play-In-Book-Form
 
Wyle_E_Coyote said:
I'm not convinced that a single interview would automatically make him a public figure, at least under Michigan law.

http://www.dmlp.org/legal-guide/michigan-defamation-law

Limited-Purpose Public Figure

A limited-purpose public figure is a person who voluntarily injects himself or is drawn into a particular public controversy. However, a private person is not automatically transformed into a limited-purpose public figure merely by becoming involved in or associated with a matter that attracts public attention. A court will look to the nature and extent of the individual's participation in the controversy. New Franklin Enterprises v. Sabo, 480 N.W.2d 326, 328 (Mich. App. 1991).

In Michigan, the following persons have been considered limited-purpose public figures:

The owner of a private art school was a public figure for the limited range of issues relating to the art school, its administration, and its problems;

A wife of a public official who injected herself into a public controversy made her a public figure for purpose of the controversy bolstered by the fact she was married to a public figure.

A retired schoolteacher who worked for the public school system for 30 years, regularly attended and voiced concerns at School Board meetings, and had his own talk show entitled "One Man's Opinion" where he discussed matters relating to the Board.

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Using Michigan again (I'm not sure that'll end up the venue) ". A public figure is "a person who by his accomplishments, fame or mode of living, or by adopting a calling which gives the public a legitimate interest in his activities, affairs, and character, has become a public personage."

Burke was questionably famous before Dr. Phil and probably an involuntary public figure, but he made himself a clear public figure by sitting for that long interview about his sister's murder on world-wide TV. I also understand he was compensated for it.

Even Lin Wood acknowledged in one of his interviews that the standard would be the public figure "actual malice" requirement.
 
observation said:
Likely due to the fact that this lawyer practices in Michigan. Can't LW just keep himself in Georgia?? All over twitter he is defending Trump and BR- anyone see that as funny as I do?? Cheers, folks.
Click to expand...

Yeah, all his saber rattling is quite humorous. And his threats such as "Putting you down as being against Burke."

He sounds like Patsy: "Better watch it PAL."

attachment.php
 

Attachments

  • money.png
    money.png
    59.1 KB · Views: 878
I think people may be reading too deeply into JB's headstone. I don't think it necessarily means that she died on Christmas. She could have easily died on the 26th (and I think it's quite possible that she did) but the Ramseys are just control freaks and drama hounds. They perversely prefer the story of a Christmas death. Their daughter was a star and deserved a big day. A holiday. Not the 26th. It tells you something about the Ramseys but I don't think it tells you much about when JB actually died.
 
observation said:
Likely due to the fact that this lawyer practices in Michigan. Can't LW just keep himself in Georgia?? All over twitter he is defending Trump and BR- anyone see that as funny as I do?? Cheers, folks.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...


Yes. By Woods name it says "pro hac vice"


pro hac vice. (proh hock vee-chay) prep. Latin for "this time only," the phrase refers to the application of an out-of-state lawyer to appear in court for a particular trial, even though he/she is not licensed to practice in the state where the trial is being held.
 
Bill W said:
I think people may be reading too deeply into JB's headstone. I don't think it necessarily means that she died on Christmas. She could have easily died on the 26th (and I think it's quite possible that she did) but the Ramseys are just control freaks and drama hounds. They perversely prefer the story of a Christmas death. Their daughter was a star and deserved a big day. A holiday. Not the 26th. It tells you something about the Ramseys but I don't think it tells you much about when JB actually died.
Click to expand...
Regardless of whether or not she actually died on Christmas - I think the point IS that the Ramsey's are definitively stating publicly that she did. Maybe because they know,, or maybe because they like the drama.
This just popped into my head - maybe when JR told MR that he found JBR at 11:00 (what seemed to be a Freudian slip), he actually meant p.m. (?) Just a thought.
 
PositiveLight said:
Oh they plan to sue CBS too. I sure hope that they do too. Then hopefully they will release the missing two hours of the CBS documentary. I think imho when LWs threatened to sue they pulled the most damning evidence from the show just to release it into the court hearing. Then the info is on legal papers. LWs and the Ramsey greed train is about to derail itself. Can't wait! CBS has those DEEP pockets. LW is barking up the wrong tree. This time maybe all of the sealed records possibly could be unsealed and they can't hide anymore. At one time I had some sympathy for Burke. But no more. He is a monster that his parents covered for. He was a monster then and he is one now too. It's time for everyone who has protected them this far to get off the Ramsey train and tell what they know. They owe at least that to JonBenet. 20 yrs is a long time for people to keep secrets. The Ramsey's shouldn't be protected. They never should have been to begin with. No kid gloves anymore. Let the cards fall where they may.
If I was Spitz lawyers I would be getting every single person who knew them to do a deposition. Someone will crack. It's against the law to withhold vital information to a case. So those who are still protecting them could be in trouble too.
JonBenet died a horrific death by one of the three people in that home that night imho and I also think it was Burke and intentional.
I'm sick of rich people skirting the law. It's time for answers. It's time for justice for JonBenet however that should come.

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Wow, that was...I don't know what that was, but I like it!
 
Ambitioned said:
Yeah, all his saber rattling is quite humorous. And his threats such as "Putting you down as being against Burke."

He sounds like Patsy: "Better watch it PAL."

attachment.php
Click to expand...

That punk. You know I hate Woody's guts, right? I love it: "Don't preach to me about money." We CAN'T, Woody. You'd know more about making money off this case than all of us put together.

There are MILLIONS of RDI! You cannot sue us all!
 
TexMex said:
Yes. By Woods name it says "pro hac vice"


pro hac vice. (proh hock vee-chay) prep. Latin for "this time only," the phrase refers to the application of an out-of-state lawyer to appear in court for a particular trial, even though he/she is not licensed to practice in the state where the trial is being held.
Click to expand...

Ha! I'd say he's a pro hack with a lot of vice!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is DeKalb County John Doe (2022)?

Members online

... and 77 more.
Total: 2,242 (members: 78, guests: 2,164)

Online statistics

Members online
78
Guests online
2,164
Total visitors
2,242
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
602,240
Messages
18,137,377
Members
231,280
Latest member
omnia
Back
Top